Sarkar v. World Savings FSB et al

Filing 42

Order by Hon. Samuel Conti denying 15 Motion to Remand.(sclc1, COURT STAFF) (Filed on 1/29/2014)

Download PDF
1 2 3 4 5 6 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 7 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 8 United States District Court For the Northern District of California 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 ) Case No. C 13-4375 ) ARNAB SARKAR, ) ORDER DENYING MOTION TO REMAND ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) WORLD SAVINGS FSB, F/K/A WELLS ) FARGO BANK, N.A.; THE BANK OF ) NEW YORK AS TRUSTEE FOR ) SECURITIZED TRUST WORLD SAVINGS ) BANK MORTGAGE PASS-THROUGH ) CERTIFICATES REMIC 28; and DOES ) 1 through 100 inclusive, ) ) ) Defendants. ) ) ) 19 20 Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. ("Wells Fargo") timely 21 removed this case from the Superior Court of the State of 22 California for the County of Contra Costa on diversity grounds. 23 ECF No. 1 ("Not. of Removal"). 24 ("Plaintiff") now moves to remand. 25 argues that complete diversity is lacking because both he and Wells 26 Fargo are citizens of California. 27 California is Wells Fargo's principal place of business. 28 Fargo contends that it is a citizen of South Dakota, the location Plaintiff Arnab Sarkar ECF No. 15 ("Mot."). Plaintiff Plaintiff points out that Wells 1 2 of its main office, and no other state. Wells Fargo's citizenship turns on 28 U.S.C. § 1348, which 3 provides in relevant part: "All national banking associations 4 shall, for the purposes of all other actions by or against them, be 5 deemed citizens of the States in which they are respectively 6 located." 7 Supreme Court addressed the meaning of the word "located." 8 1348 purposes, the court held that a national bank is a citizen of 9 the state in which its main office is located, rather than a United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 11 In Wachovia Bank v. Schmidt, 546 U.S. 303 (2006), the citizen of every state in which it maintains a branch. For § Id. at 307. Since Schmidt was decided, a number of judges in this district 12 have endorsed a dual-citizenship approach in the § 1348 context. 13 See Martinez v. Wells Fargo Bank, 946 F. Supp. 2d 1010, 1024 (N.D. 14 Cal. 2013) (Chen J.); Vargas v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., 12-CV-02008- 15 JST, 2013 WL 6235575, at *8 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 2, 2013) (Tigar J.). 16 These decisions hold that Schmidt did not overrule American Surety 17 Co. v. Bank of California, 133 F.2d 160 (9th Cir. 1943), a 1943 18 decision in which the Ninth Circuit held that a national banking 19 association's citizenship is fixed by the location of its principal 20 place of business. 21 Under this line of cases, a national banking association is located 22 in either the state of its principal place of business or the state 23 of its main office. 24 See Martinez, 946 F. Supp. 2d at 1016-17. The dual-citizenship approach appears to be the minority view. 25 Though the Ninth Circuit has yet to weigh in on whether American 26 Surety is still good law, most of the judges in this district have 27 held that, for the purposes of assessing diversity jurisdiction, a 28 national banking association is located in only one state, that of 2 1 its main office. See, e.g., Meyer v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., C 13- 2 03727 WHA, 2013 WL 6407516, at *2 (N.D. Cal. Dec. 6, 2013) (Alsup 3 J.); Lindberg v. Wells Fargo Bank N.A., C 13-0808 PJH, 2013 WL 4 3457078, at *1 (N.D. Cal. July 9, 2013) (Hamilton J.); Yong Chull 5 Kim v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 5:12-CV-02066-EJD, 2012 WL 3155577, 6 at *2-3 (N.D. Cal. Aug. 2, 2012) (Davila J.); Tse v. Wells Fargo 7 Bank, N.A., C10-4441 TEH, 2011 WL 175520, at *2-3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 8 19, 2011) (Henderson J.); Atienza v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 9 10–3457, 2011 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1738, at *3 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 4, 2011) United States District Court For the Northern District of California 10 (Seeborg J.); DeLeon v. Wells Fargo Bank, N.A., 729 F. Supp. 2d 11 1119, 1123-24 (N.D. Cal. 2010) (Fogel J.). 12 the only Circuit that has squarely addressed the issue since 13 Schmidt -- has also rejected the dual-citizenship approach. 14 Fargo Bank, N.A. v. WMR e-PIN, LLC, 653 F.3d 702, 709 (8th Cir. 15 2011). 16 The Eighth Circuit -- Wells The Court finds the reasoning of these cases persuasive and 17 adopts the majority view that, for the purposes of § 348, a 18 national bank is a citizen of only the state in which its main 19 office is located. 20 is a citizen of South Dakota and that there exists complete 21 diversity among the parties in the instant action. 22 motion to remand is DENIED. Accordingly, the Court finds that Wells Fargo Plaintiff's 23 24 IT IS SO ORDERED. 25 26 Dated: January 29, 2014 27 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 28 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?